New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

RCR decision sucks!!!

post #1 of 20
Thread Starter 
Rcr passed a decision on tearing down their terrain parks.
watch it here: http://www.rip.tv/video/watch/4543/

show your support here: http://savercrterrainparks.com

thanks!
post #2 of 20
I didn't watch that vid, but i did read the press release outta Calgary on November 8th. Seems to me the park itself will remain, it is the man made jumps that will not be built this season. I guess someone didn't scope the landing and really messed themselves up. Yes it does suck, but some of the best air I've ever found has been natural terrain.
post #3 of 20
I read the thread about this on TGR. That press release was pure and utter BS, and as several people pointed out the same company is going ahead full throttle with big features in other places.

If you read the press release, it is pretty clear it is marketing-d-bag for "too expensive."
post #4 of 20
Personally I don't mind the removal of parks.

But I also understand the parks are what draw some paying guest to the mountain.

I'll also say I enjoy watching the kids that can handle the parks, it is impressive to watch the ones that know what there doing.

I'm sure everybody can see the danger when someone who skis/rides a few times a season enters one of these parks and think they can use the features as well as the next guy or girl.

I'm sure everyone has read the back of there lift ticket...

The problem is, it's impossible for a mountain employee to caution and train every paying guest on how to use the parks.

The ski area's post sign age, but who reads them?

People have to take responsibility for there own actions, no matter how stupid that action is. I also understand the mountain chooses to install these features. But remember, they do it because some of the paying guest request them.

Most of us have a self preservation instinct that protects us, notice I said most of us.

So it comes down to, how do you keep people from doing stupid things?
post #5 of 20
Welcome to 1993....
post #6 of 20
Most of the Michigan ski areas have announced removal of tabletops from their terrain parks. They'll still have jumps and half pipes, along with rails and "other terrain features", but they say the liability as well as the cost of maintaining tabletops is more than they're worth.
post #7 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Capacity View Post
So it comes down to, how do you keep people from doing stupid things?
That's like asking how you make gold from straw.

Kids see pros and experts on tv throwing crazy stuff, not realizing how skilled these guys are, how much they've practiced (into foam/water etc) and think they can go out and huck like that.

My favorite thing in terrain parks is the jumps. When we were in JH a couple years back our whole group had a lot of stupid, silly fun doing repeated runs at the end of the day through their little terrain park. The jumps were wonderfully shaped and you could clear the table top and then some -- and yes, you had to control your speed to not land below the downgrade of the landing zone.

If ski areas remove jumps, kids will build them anyway. Frankly I think rails are a lot more dangerous -- at least for me. I hate those things.

I suppose if ski resorts are going to build jumps, there ought to be some kind of standards they can use to guide them. But the ultimate responsibililty has to reside with the rider/skier to scope out the jump, approach it with some caution and reason, understand the feel of the jump and the landing zone. That stuff can change daily with snow conditions, number of riders, etc. Anyone who hucks a jump without a test run or two is taking a bigger risk than is necessary. It's not a backcountry run where they have one shot at it.

Personal responsibility, we can't has it -- not yours. It's so much easier to blame someone else for our bad choices, hurt feelings, and failed aspirations. So many people want, even when they dont' deserve.

I think the next time I cut myself with a knife I'm going to sue the knife manufacturer for not making the knife safer.
post #8 of 20
Well, it is easy to overlook the fact that Ski Areas are a business. They provide a service to the consumer in exchange for money. The liability insurance for terrain parks I am sure is quite pricey.

As many here know, when you set up your homoenwers policy they ask if you have a skateboard ramp in your yard, or a swimming pool. If you answer yes, your liability rider on the policy is going to double, or perhaps even triple depending on the specifics. That's just the nature of the insurance business. I suspect the insurance company has raised the rates signifigantly due to recent lawsuits. Instead of paying the high rates, many homeowners will simply get rid of the skateboard ramp to save a chunk of cash.

Can't blame the ski areas for wanting to reduce their costs in this area if it is really out of hand. After all, the goal of any business is to maximize profit. On the other hand, the consumer drives the economy. If people take their business elsewhere and they realise their margin has gone down due to the decreased ticket trevenue and all the other stuff that goes with it, they may reconsider.

When it's all said and done, however, I think this may be a trend in the business. Insurance is quite a large chunk of change for most business establishments, and I am sure the rates are not going down. If a ski area needs to cut corners the most prudent thing to do would look at the insurance policy.
post #9 of 20
I think the people that are getting the worst of this deal are those that piad for Season's Passes on the premise that these jumps would be in the parks. They (rcr and affiliated ski areas)obviously knew that this was going to happen but they went ahead and sold passes before they made the announcement. Which really sucks.
post #10 of 20
If part of a business costs more than it brings in, it's gott'a go. Adios trauma parks.
post #11 of 20
Oh crap.....that means more MSP wannabes heading over to Sunshine:
post #12 of 20
All conjecture. None of you appear to have a clue what the costs nor the revenues involved look like. Don't comment like you do.
post #13 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garrett View Post
All conjecture. None of you appear to have a clue what the costs nor the revenues involved look like. Don't comment like you do.
Whatever the explanation involves, it has to do with saving money somewhere.
post #14 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulR View Post
Whatever the explanation involves, it has to do with saving money somewhere.
This part we all know. The rest is pure BS.
post #15 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garrett View Post
This part we all know. The rest is pure BS.
Just think what the cost of a season pass could be reduced to, if the area's didn't have to pay the extra insurance for the parks ?

That should get Garrett going...
post #16 of 20
And me.

I think billyymc hits the nail on the head.
As long as people sue others for their own stupidity or, in the best case, for their own bad judgement, liability insurrance is gonna go up and that means that either prices will rise or risks will be minimized as much as possible.

We have a saying in Dutch that freely translated goes something like this: "He who burns his ass has to sit on the blisters."
post #17 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schussboelie View Post
We have a saying in Dutch that freely translated goes something like this: "He who burns his ass has to sit on the blisters."
I think the English equivalent is "He who farts in church, sit in his own pew...."
post #18 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by DedReer View Post
I think the people that are getting the worst of this deal are those that piad for Season's Passes on the premise that these jumps would be in the parks. They (rcr and affiliated ski areas)obviously knew that this was going to happen but they went ahead and sold passes before they made the announcement. Which really sucks.

RCR also said they will refund your money for your pass before the official opening date if you wish.
post #19 of 20

Monitored Terrain Parks

Intrawest has a special pass that is required for entry to their "serious" parks at at least a couple of their resorts (Whistler & Blue are two that I know of for sure). To get this pass (good for the season), you have to sit through a safety video, and a helmet is mandatory. There's a nominal cost, which is waived for season pass holders. Your park pass is checked when you enter the lift access area -- no pass, no entry.

My entirely subjective assessment of this approach is that it works reasonably well to keep a lot of people out of the park who aren't ready for it. For the beginner park rats, there are some more basic level terrain features in open areas that anyone can practice on.
post #20 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by mogulmuncher View Post
Intrawest has a special pass that is required for entry to their "serious" parks at at least a couple of their resorts (Whistler & Blue are two that I know of for sure). To get this pass (good for the season), you have to sit through a safety video, and a helmet is mandatory. There's a nominal cost, which is waived for season pass holders. Your park pass is checked when you enter the lift access area -- no pass, no entry.

My entirely subjective assessment of this approach is that it works reasonably well to keep a lot of people out of the park who aren't ready for it. For the beginner park rats, there are some more basic level terrain features in open areas that anyone can practice on.
I always thought that was a very good idea on WB's behalf.

The decision surprised a quite a few in the skiing community in Australia as well. RCR had looked into buying our biggest resort, Perisher Blue, which as the best parks in the country. There would be a lot of unhappy people if those parks didn't happen anymore (and they wouldn't happen because our big jumps are all man made snow!).
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Skiing Discussion